From: Eric Walker
<mix...@bigpond.com> wrote:
(Still not impossible, as the maximum energy you can get
from Hydrinos is 137^2
x 13.6 eV ~= 255 keV (actually precisely half an electron
mass) from each
Hydrogen atom.)
This is to full redundancy? I think there's an effect that
is believed to decrease the likelihood of shrinkage in direct proportion
with increasingly redundancy, such that even level 1/4 is hard to get to?
Actually it was suggested early-on in the development of Mills’ theory that
once the shrinkage reached a threshold level, it would become autocatalytic
“all the way down”… which is kind of like the old aphorism for all-things
unknowable: “turtles all the way down”… and yes, equally without proof. (but
appealing in simplicity)
If we must choose between the two major non-nuclear hypothetical sources for
power density in LENR – some version of the Dirac sea (ZPE) seems to beat
out electron shrinkage by a country mile (well, at least a factor of 2) even
if both employ electrons as the mass which is to be converted. Plus the
beauty of Dirac, in the guise of “dark energy” is that it works as a “sink”
as well as a source. In fact, the Dirac sea works better for LENR as an
energy sink than as a energy source.
IOW, the “holes” in the Dirac sea are positrons in another dimension, so we
can essentially send electrons into that sink (if we find the gateway) and
retain the full mass energy value in 3-space, instead of a fraction (if
energy is conserved) and not worry about the annihilation photons at 511
keV, since that event does not happen in 3-space. This could be why the
active electron in LENR, once it goes into autocatalytic redundancy (in an
alternative to Mills theory) “keeps on going and going”… like the energizer
battery :-)
This is where things get interesting – the interplay of Nickel, LENR,
Gravity and the Dirac sea.
The idea of nickel or a nickel isotope being the gateway to the Dirac sea is
then in the forefront. In trying to find small details that point to why
nickel is (apparently) the most effective element for this transfer of
energy in LENR, more so than iron - one curious detail found in geology of
earth… which is “gravity anomalies”. This is the way geologists find nickel
deposits (and iron).
Gravity anomalies correlate well with nickel deposits, but also with iron.
Of course, the standard rationale for this is that many of these deposits
are ancient asteroid impact areas, and the source of nickel is from the
meteorite.
Well and good, but maybe that explanation overlooks another possible
explanation, which is a bit convoluted, so bear with me.
1) Nickel proportionality - to iron in Fe/Ni meteorites… Iron is found
in much higher ratio than on earth’s surface, tens of times higher than in
meteorites. IOW - on earth’s present day surface, iron is far more
prevalent, possibly indicating that nickel has become depleted on the
surface of earth over billions of years, except in the younger impact sites.
2) If Ni were itself more susceptible to interaction with gravity, in
some unexplained way that is beyond its higher density, then it would have
disappeared faster from early earth, when the surface was molten. Of course,
Ni is denser to start with, and that is one major factor - but is there
something more vis-à-vis the force of gravity and two dense metals? Uranium
is dense, but there is plenty on the surface, so density alone may not be
the only determinant of surface proportionality.
3) We only assume the interior of earth is mostly iron – when in fact
the interior could easily be mostly nickel. In fact, why not mostly nickel?
Answer: traditional belief.
4) The actual density of earth’s core seems to be higher than either
iron or nickel, but nickel is significantly denser than iron – ergo – more
nickel could be in the core than iron.
5) Many of the largest meteorites are over 50% nickel, yet they are
still called “iron” meteorites by tradition, since in general most of the
smaller one are higher in iron.
6) Hydrogen interacts far differently with iron than nickel and that
could be the “other factor” beyond density.
7) If the core of earth was mostly nickel, with dissolved hydrogen in
dense form, then the source of interior heat of earth, which is assumed to
come from uranium decay, could be coming from LENR !!
In short, geologists assume many things in nature - based on the way the
surface of earth looks now, instead of what it could have looked like
earlier.
That argument above - is a long way to go to support a premise that nickel
could be a better “gateway” to Dirac, by being more susceptible to gravity,
in some way which goes beyond its higher density. However, this is worth
posing as an argument wrt to nickel’s higher propensity to absorb protons
and the heat source of earth’s core.
And this argument about hidden nickel properties has not yet broached
unification of gravity with electromagnetism, which should be part of the
argument… both Ni and Fe are ferromagnetic, but there is a lot of difference
in the way that they interact with magnetism and this is probably reflected
in the way they interact with protons.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
